Szerzői útmutató

Author’s Guide – download

 

1.     MISSION STATEMENT OF THE JOURNAL

Health, defined by the WHO as a state of complete physical, social, and mental well-being, not just the absence of disease or infirmity, is the source of our life. Well-being, also according to the WHO, is a positive state experienced by individuals, groups, and societies. Like health, it is a resource for everyday life, determined by social, economic, and environmental conditions. Our aim is to promote the formulation of a more and more accurate and complete picture about health and well-being through introducing the works of researchers of several disciplines on health and well-being and their social determinants. We expect that the increase in cross-disciplinary shared knowledge will contribute to the improvement of the population’s health and well-being.

To this end, the journal invites contributions on health and well-being from a variety of experts from Hungary and abroad with different scientific backgrounds, analysing and interpreting health and well-being from the specific perspective of a discipline. In addition to presenting the authors' own research, the journal also invites the introduction of contributions from others on related topics and relevant literature. The relevant disciplines include public health, preventive medicine, psychology, nutrition science, sports science, sociology, social work, social policy, education, economics, cultural anthropology, and their interdisciplinary fields. Accordingly, the journal is a multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed scientific journal available online without subscription.

 

2.     INTRODUCTION

The Editorial Board of the Journal of Multidisciplinary Health and Well-Being (hereafter referred to as: Journal) compiled the Author Guidelines (hereafter referred to as: Guidelines) based on the main principles of the Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals worked out by the International Committee of Medical Journals Editors(www.icmje.org). For more information about the Journal, please visit the website or email to mej.folyoirat@gmail.com.

 

3.     MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION

3.1.      General information

In order to speed up the review process and make it more transparent, manuscripts can only be submitted to the journal electronically, using the Open Journal System (hereafter referred to as OJS) editorial software. Communication with authors or readers is also done electronically, through this system.

The Journal publishes manuscripts in the following sections, from which the author is required to choose when uploading the manuscript: Researches, Reviews, Opinions, Short Reviews, News, Commentary. The different requirements for each section are detailed in the Guidelines below.

Manuscripts for submission should follow the present Author Guidelines, available to read and download on the journal's website. Manuscripts that do not comply with the Author Guidelines will not be approved by the Editorial Board, and authors will be notified of the need for revision.

The manuscript must not contain material previously published or submitted for publication elsewhere or accepted as part of a not yet published manuscript. At the time of submission, the Editorial Board must be informed of the inclusion of any submissions in other previously published or under consideration communications (accompanied by a copy of the manuscript or a copy of the article published in the printed or electronic press). This can be uploaded in the OJS under 'Notes to the Editor'. At the time of submission, the Editorial Board should be informed of any excerpts from other publications previously published or under consideration (with a copy of the manuscript or a copy of the article in the printed or electronic press. This can be uploaded in the OJS under "Notes to the editor".

3.2.      Ethical publishing

The Journal is committed to the practice of ethical scientific publishing. Accordingly, it adopts and follows the recommended practices of the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors, and the Core Practices. Our authors are expected to comply with the requirements for accurate reporting of data, to clearly identify the work of others through correct and consistent bibliographic citations, and to declare any potential conflicts of interest. In the event of a breach of ethical principles, the Editorial Board will first consult with the authors to clarify the issues. If necessary, it also hires a publication ethics expert. If a serious ethical breach is discovered after publication, the manuscript will be withdrawn.

3.3.      Uploading the Manuscript

The first step is for the author to register in OJS, which can be done on the Journal's website, and then start uploading the manuscript by clicking on the "Submit Manuscript" button. If you have any questions or problems using the system, please contact mej.folyoirat@gmail.com.

When uploading the manuscript, the author must declare the following in OJS:

  • the article has not been previously published elsewhere and is not under simultaneous consideration by another journal;
  • waives the right to the first publication of the article in favour of the Journal of Multidisciplinary Health and Well-Being;
  • on the Journal's website, the publication is available free of charge to the public, and it may be used freely, provided the source is properly cited;
  • in the event of a legal issue, the applicable current legislation on the rights and obligations of the Author and the Publisher, in particular the guidelines of Act LXXVI of 1999 on Copyrights pertains;
  • the final version of the manuscript has been read and approved by all co-authors.

Please provide details (including author(s) name(s), place of work, title of the article and, if relevant, the abstract and keywords) when registering and submitting your manuscript. Please do NOT use a titulus when entering the name of the author(s) in the OJS. For each author, please also fill in the Institution field (official institution name, settlement and country).

The manuscript to be uploaded must not contain any information that would help to identify the author(s), but ONLY the title, abstract and keywords of the publication, the body of the article (including figures and tables inserted in the text) and a list of references in the language of the publication. Do not include the name(s), place(s) of work of the author(s) or acknowledgements!

In the case of peer-reviewed manuscripts (Researches, Reviews and Opinions), the author can enter the names of experts they wish to exclude from the peer review process in the "Notes to the Editor" field.

3.4.      Authorship

Authorship is warranted if the contribution of the person to the preparation of the manuscript covers either of the following: design or analysis and interpretation of data; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; preparation of the final version to be published. Participants other than the author(s) shall be mentioned in the Acknowledgements or in a separate appendix.

3.5.      Secondary publication

Secondary publication is generally not accepted, but sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met.

  • if the work has been presented as a preliminary report (preprint) in the context of a scientific meeting, as an abstract or poster, or in conference proceedings;
  • if the work is translated or it is intended for a different group of readers, provided that both journals have authorized the secondary publication.

In the title of the secondary publication, marked as a footnote, the original publication shall be cited in full.

 

4.     APPROVAL, REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF MANUSCRIPTS

4.1.      Editorial process

The Editorial Office will compare the submitted manuscripts with the requirements described in the Guidelines and will report back to the author within 10 working days on whether the manuscript has been accepted by the Editorial Board or what changes are needed following the Guidelines to accept the manuscript.

The manuscript for the Researches, Reviews and Opinions sections (see later) are peer-reviewed, with one peer reviewer evaluating the manuscript as a whole and another reviewer evaluating the statistical methodology, if necessary. (The criteria for the peer review are set out at the end of this Guidelines.) The Editorial Board decides on the acceptance of the manuscript for publication (taking into account the peer review in the case of Original Publications and, if necessary, including a new peer reviewer), of which the Editor informs the author and, if necessary, indicates the changes they consider necessary for the publication of the manuscript.

The author returns the revised manuscript to the editor, who checks the changes. The manuscript is then sent to the reading editor, who also proofreads it, suggests linguistic and, where appropriate, content changes to the author for better readability, and ensures linguistic correctness. The author has three working days to make the changes requested by the reading editor or to accept the suggestions. Once the proofreading is complete, the manuscript is edited to final form by the copyeditor, which is sent back to the reading editor for re-proofreading, who returns the final manuscript to the author for approval. The author has two working days to ask for changes to the manuscript that has already been edited. If the author does not provide feedback on the edited manuscript, it will be considered accepted. The author will be notified when the final approved manuscript is published.

4.2.      The peer review process and confidentiality of the manuscript

Manuscripts submitted under the Researches, Reviews and Opinions sections are considered confidentially. The peer reviewer will receive the article without any references to the author, if it is technically possible. Unless the expert(s) themselves declare otherwise, they shall remain anonymous to the author. If further experts comment on the manuscript, they will receive the comments of the previous expert(s) without their names. Peer reviewers are required to report any competing interests with the supposed authors or with the research presented, and should exclude themselves from handling the manuscript.

Information about the manuscript and its evaluation process will only be given by the Editorial Office to the author and the reviewer. The peer reviewer(s) may not make copies of the full article or of its parts for their own use.  

4.3.      Protection of the rights of research participants

The ethical compliance of the research and the disclosure of its results - provided the research has been granted an ethical approval - must be certified by an ethical approval number. If a study has not been granted ethics committee approval but involved human participants, it is important that it does not violate the provisions of the Helsinki Declaration. If doubt exists whether the research complies with the ethical standards and the authors cannot adequately clarify the issue, the Editorial Board will not approve the manuscript. Identifying details of participants should not be published in the main text or in the figures unless the participant gave written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for publication should be indicated in the manuscript.  

4.4.      Disclosure of the content of the manuscript prior to publication

The full content or parts of an accepted, but not yet published manuscript shall be disclosed by the author only after the Journal has published it. An exception is if the author reports serious adverse health effects in the article or in the letter, however in this case the prior consent of the Editorial Board must be also obtained.

4.5.      Changes to the article content after publication

If the authors find an error in the content of the publication, they may publish it as an Erratum alongside the original article. Changes to the authors and the order of authorship can only be made if a related justified request, signed by all authors, is received by the Editorial Office. A request for the withdrawal of authorship or the publication of an apology may also be made in writing to the Editorial Office, stating the reasons for the request. Requests of this type should be sent directly to the Editor-in-Chief via e-mail: vitrai.jozsef@gmail.com.

 

5.     STRUCTURE OF MANUSCRIPTS

5.1.      Researches

Under this column, the authors shall present their own research findings and related conclusions in the light of the backgrounds and international data.

Required structure:

  • A maximum of 500 words Abstract in Hungarian and in English (Introduction/Background, Methodology, Results, Conclusions)
  • Keywords in Hungarian and is English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter))
  • Key messages in 3 sentences of up to 25 words, answer the following questions:
    • Why is the topic important?
    • What has been known about the topic so far?
    • How does this article contribute to a better understanding of the topic?
  • The main text shall not exceed 3000 words, excluding tables, keywords, figures, and references:
    • Introduction (required content: background/antecedents, research aims/research questions)
    • Methodology
    • Results (including sample characteristics)
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
  • List of references

5.2.      Reviews

The publications under this column summarize and critically evaluate the literature on a specific topic, selected by the author using a pre-set methodology. The pre-set search-, selection- and evaluation methodology should be described in the manuscript.

Required structure:

  • A maximum 500 words Abstract in Hungarian and in English (Introduction/Background, Methodology, Results, Conclusions)
  • Keywords in Hungarian and is English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter)
  • Key messages in 3 sentences of up to 25 words, answer the following questions:
    • Why is the topic important?
    • What has been known about the topic so far?
    • How does this article contribute to a better understanding of the topic?
  • The main text shall not exceed 3000 words, excluding tables, keywords, figures, and references:
    • Introduction (required content: background/antecedents, research aims/research questions)
    • Methodology
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
  • List of references

5.3.      Opinions

The section aims to foster constructive professional dialogue by sharing opinions, ideas and discussion papers on health and well-being. The views expressed in the Opinions section are those of the author and do not, of course, necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Editorial Board.

Required structure:

  • A maximum 500 words Abstract in Hungarian and in English (Introduction/Background, Methodology, Results, Conclusions)
  • Keywords in Hungarian and is English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter)
  • Key messages in 3 sentences of up to 25 words, answer the following questions:
    • Why is the topic important?
    • What has been known about the topic so far?
    • How does this article contribute to a better understanding of the topic?
  • The main text shall not exceed 3000 words, excluding tables, keywords, figures, and references:
    • Introduction (required content: background/antecedents, research aims/research questions)
    • Methodology
    • Results (including sample characteristics)
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
  • List of references

5.4.      Artificial intelligence

In the articles published in this column, the authors share their knowledge and experience of using artificial intelligence (AI) for health and well-being.

Required structure:

  • A maximum 500 words Abstract in Hungarian and in English (Objective, Accomplishment, Conclusions)
  • Keywords in Hungarian and is English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter)
  • The main text shall not exceed 2000 words, excluding tables, keywords, figures, and references:
    • Introduction (required content: background/antecedents, research aims/research questions)
    • Objective (objective/question)
    • Accomplishment
    • Conclusions
  • List of references

5.5.      Junior researches

This section is dedicated to publications by students studying and intending to enter a career in health and social sciences. The formal and structural requirements are the same as for Researches or Reviews except for the length of the publication and the fact that the article is reviewed by the editorial board.

Required structure:

  • A maximum of 500 words Abstract in Hungarian and in English (Introduction/Background, Methodology, Results, Conclusions)
  • Keywords in Hungarian and is English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter))
  • Key messages in 3 sentences of up to 25 words, answer the following questions:
    • Why is the topic important?
    • What has been known about the topic so far?
    • How does this article contribute to a better understanding of the topic?
  • The main text shall not exceed 1500 words, excluding tables, keywords, figures, and references:
    • Introduction (required content: background/antecedents, research aims/research questions)
    • Methodology
    • Results (including sample characteristics)
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
  • List of references

5.6.      Visual extracts

This section is for presenting illustrations that convey an important message.

Required structure:

  • Title in the following format: Visual extract: Title
  • Keywords in Hungarian and in English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter).
  • In the main body of the document, a few lines of background and antecedents in a maximum of 200 words; up to 3 figures, with explanatory text and source citation below; and the presenter's findings on national applicability in 3-5 sentences at the end, under the subheading "Recommendation".
  •  

5.7.      Short Reviews

There are several types of content available in the Short Reviews section:

  • Article review: a short summary of articles published and peer-reviewed elsewhere.
  • Policy document: presenting concepts, recommendations, standards and methodological guidelines in the field of promoting health and well-being, presenting position statements, key working papers, reports or other key documents, websites of national and international organisations of relevant disciplines - including public health, preventive medicine, psychology, nutrition science, sports science, sociology, social work, social policy, education, economics, cultural anthropology and their interdisciplinary fields.
  • Book review: a short review of a book or publication.
  • Recommendation: recommendation of the current issue of other journals.
  • Translation: literal translation of highly relevant professional article.

Required structure:

  • Title chosen by the author in the following format: Article review: Title; Report: Title; Book review: Title; Recommendation: Title.
  • Exact bibliographical reference of the article/document/book/webpage etc. to be reviewed (see later).
  • Keywords in Hungarian and in English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter).
  • If required by the length of the text presented, an Abstract may be included in a maximum of 500-500 words, the author deciding on the structure.
  • The main text shall not exceed 1000 words excluding tables, keywords and figures, in the original structure of the document presented, with the presenter's findings on national applicability in 3-5 sentences at the end, under the subheading "Recommendation".
  • References (reference of the article/document/book/webpage etc. to be reviewed and if the author refers to other publications than the one reviewed).

5.8.      Translations

In this section translations of highly relevant professional documents may be published if the text is at least 50% identical to the original text.

Required structure:

  • Title in the following format: Translation: Title
  • Keywords in Hungarian and in English, minimum 3 maximum 5 (to be entered in OJS one by one, separated by Enter).
  • Main body.
  •  

5.9.      News

The section can be used to announce or report on professional events, or to introduce professional organisations or outstanding professionals. Concerning the appropriate structure of the manuscript the author decides and it should not exceed 300 words.

5.10.   Commentary

This section is for comments and opinions related to an article published in the Journal (exceptionally elsewhere). The title of the commentary may be chosen by the author, but the first sentence should refer to the article to which the commentary relates. Other literature may also be cited, the author decides on the appropriate structure of the manuscript, which should not exceed 500 words.

 

6.     FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS OF MANUSCRIPTS

6.1.      File format and word processing

Please submit your manuscript in Microsoft Word (doc, docx) or rtf format. The text of the manuscript should be in 11-point Calibri font, single-spaced, justified, with no bolding or underlining outside the headings. Exceptions should be made for foreign words and proper names (e.g. names of institutions, titles of professional documents), which should be in italics. In addition, the author may indicate the prominence of other words in bold type, but the editorial staff reserves the right to make changes where excessive bolding would limit the readability of the text. Please make sure that the order (level) of the headings is clear.

In both the text and the tables, enter up to one decimal place, except for it is absolutely necessary for making distinction between the numerical values. Do not use the ± sign to indicate standard deviation, use the abbreviation "SD" instead. Exceptions are p-values for statistical tests, where 3 decimal places other than 0 are to be presented.

6.2.      Title

The title of the article should be as short as possible (maximum 140 characters with spaces in both languages) and attracting attention, without containing abbreviations or references. The Editorial Board may make suggestions as to the title of the article.

6.3.      Footnotes

Explanations and notes to the articles should be included in a footnote, marked as 1, 2, 3, etc.

6.4.      References

In the Journal, citations follow the current recommendations of the American Psychological Association (APA) (7th edition).

The following websites can help you apply the APA recommendation:

https://apastyle.apa.org/

https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/examples

https://www.isu.edu/media/libraries/student-success/tutoring/handouts-writing/using-sources/APA7-Style.pdf

Free online reference generators can help with formatting, and the resulting reference should be copied and pasted into the text of the manuscript. The Editorial Office recommends the following applications:

https://www.citethisforme.com/us/citation-generator/apa  

https://www.scribbr.com/apa-citation-generator/  

And with the help of free reference managers, references can be imported directly into the manuscript, i.e. the software also creates the cross-references and automatically generates the bibliography on the basis of them:            

https://www.zotero.org/  

https://www.mendeley.com/

Use the "Cite" function next to the title of the article in PubMed to retrieve the APA citation of the article.

6.5.      Figures, tables

Colour and black and white figures and tables can also be inserted in the manuscript.

All figures and tables are to be numbered using Arabic numerals, supplying a caption (title) above them.

The source of the figures should always be indicated in the figure caption in brackets, e.g. "... in Hungary (Source: KSH...)", the APA referencing in the text as well as the figure or table number or page number of the figure or table referred to, or in the case of your own figure or table "Source: own editing".

Abbreviations in figures and tables should also be explained in the figure and table captions in brackets, e.g. "(Source: Kovács, 2006. Abbreviations: CI: confidence interval, ...).

In all cases, tables should be inserted in the manuscript in an editable format, as the Journal uses a standard table format.

In-text references to figures and tables should be given aside the sentence, in square brackets. E.g. "... observed. [Table 2] The program ...". If referenced as part of the text, include "... as shown in Figure 1..." .

Figures should have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi (any image format (png, tif, jpg, etc.) can be chosen). The figure should also be uploaded as an attachment.

6.6.      Acknowledgements

In the "Notes to the editor" field (when uploading the manuscript), you should indicate any funding or interests that may have influenced the preparation of the manuscript, and you can also indicate your thanks. The Acknowledgements may include both the financial support and the names of persons for whom the terms of authorship (see above) are not met.

6.7.      Spelling

The Editorial Office is responsible for the linguistic proofreading of accepted manuscripts.

Please use either the British or the American spelling style consistently throughout your manuscript.

We recommend the following dictionaries when writing:

the Concise Oxford English Dictionary for British style and spelling

the New Oxford American Dictionary for US style and spelling.

6.8.      Supplementary materials

In addition to the figures in the manuscript, any electronic material, text, images, video or audio material that the author considers aiding the reader in understanding the article may be uploaded as a supplement. The maximum size of an uploaded file is 8 MB; for larger file sizes, please contact the Editorial Office directly (mej.folyoirat@gmail.com).

 

7.     PEER REVIEW CRITERIA

PEER REVIEW CRITERIA OF RESEARCH ARTICLES

  • Is the topic of the publication relevant to the objectives of the journal? (Is the manuscript current and relevant to the readers of the journal, based on the national and international literature, national health promotion objectives, challenges, and practices?)
  • Does the manuscript fit under the column indicated by the author, i.e., does it report on their own research results not published elsewhere?
  • Can translation, secondary publication, plagiarism be excluded?
  • Is the author clear about the aim of the article? (Did the author explain the relevance of the topic, refer to relevant backgrounds?)
  • Is the methodology used in the study described in sufficient detail to enable other researchers to replicate the study? (Does it clearly describe the circumstances in which the research data were generated, such as data sources, sampling method or questionnaire used? Does it describe in sufficient detail the method of analysis used?)
  • Did the author choose an appropriate data collection and analysis methodology for the topic of the study? (Are the study data and the analytical procedures chosen appropriate for the purpose of the analysis?)
  • Does it adequately present the results of the author's study and the conclusions drawn? (Does the author describe the limitations of the study? Does the author compare with previously published study results? Are the results of the study clearly distinguished from the author's conclusions? Are the conclusions supported by the results presented? Are the conclusions related to the objectives of the paper?)
  • Are the literature references in the article adequate? (Are all the relevant literature references to the topic discussed included? Are there any references not related to the topic?)
  • Are the figures and tables in the article appropriate? (Are the figures and tables labelled and captioned appropriately from a technical point of view? Can the captioned figures and tables be understood alone?)

PEER REVIEW CRITERIA FOR REVIEWS

  • Is the topic of the publication relevant to the objectives of the journal? (Is the manuscript current and relevant to the journal's readers, based on national and international literature, national health promotion objectives, challenges, and practices?)
  • Does the manuscript fit under the column indicated by the author?
  • Can translation, secondary publication, plagiarism be excluded?
  • Is the author clear about the aim of the article? (Did the author explain the relevance of the topic, refer to relevant backgrounds?)
  • Is the methodology described in the article adequately documented, is the search verifiable, could it be replicated by other researchers? (Does it say what sources were searched, what criteria were used to select the articles reviewed, how were they evaluated?)
  • Did the author choose an appropriate search and evaluation methodology for the topic? (appropriate sources, keywords, time period, evaluation method? Were all relevant articles on the topic found?)
  • Does the author adequately present the results of their review and conclusions? (Are the results of the review clearly distinguished from the conclusions drawn by the author? Are the conclusions supported by the results? Are the conclusions related to the objectives of the article?)
  • Are the figures and tables in the article correct? (Are the figures and tables labelled and captioned appropriately from a technical point of view? Can the captioned figures and tables be understood alone?)

PEER REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMMENTARY

  • Is the topic of the publication relevant to the objectives of the journal? (Is the manuscript current and relevant to the journal's readers, based on national and international literature, national health promotion objectives, challenges, and practices?)
  • Does the manuscript fit under the column indicated by the author?
  • Can translation, secondary publication, plagiarism be excluded?
  • Is the author clear about the aim of the article? (Has the relevance of the topic been explained, and is there any relevant background?)
  • Does the author adequately explain their views on the chosen topic? (Does the author describe the main features of the topic? Is the author's opinion clearly expressed? Is the reasoning for their opinion sufficiently clear? Does the author present the well-known, similar, or different opinions in the field?)
  • Are the figures and tables in the article appropriate? (Are the figures and tables labelled and captioned appropriately from a technical point of view? Can the captioned figures and tables be understood alone?)

STATISTICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

  • Has the author clearly defined the purpose of the research? (Is it clear what new results the research is trying to reach at?)
  • Does the study design fit the research objective? (i.e., ideally, would the study answer the research question)?
  • Were the data collection procedure and statistical methodology described in sufficient detail to allow for a repeated analysis? (Were the circumstances in which the survey data were generated under, such as data sources, sampling method or questionnaire used clearly described? If a less common method is used, has a relevant literature source been provided?)
  • Did the author choose the right data and data collection procedure for the topic of the study? (Are the study data adequately representing the study population corresponding to the intended purpose of the analysis?)
  • Did the author choose an appropriate analytical methodology given the topic of the study and the data? (Are the indicators and analytical procedures chosen suitable for the purpose of the analysis? Are the conditions for applying the chosen analytical procedure met?)
  • Is the author presenting the results of the analysis adequately? (Do they give the degree of uncertainty in addition to the point estimates? If tests are used, is the p-value given?)
  • Are the graphs and tables in the article correct? (Are the graphs and tables labelled and captioned appropriately from a statistical point of view? Can the captioned figures and tables be interpreted alone?)
  • Does the author interpret the presented results well and draws conclusions from them? (Does the author explain the limitations of the analysis, e.g., low number of items, non-representative sample)?